Elections 2020 Democratic Primary Thread v4

[Phisher]

It’s worth harping on imo. An intelligent person who understands what Bernie stood for and is all about cannot possibly support Trump. People who made that switch are about the cult of personality and not policy, fairness or even basic decency.

Wrong. Read the 538 post that I linked. Bernie-to-Trump voters are largely conservative leaning, anti-establishment voters who feel left behind and wanted to see the system disrupted. Both Sanders and Trump ran on breaking the status quo and had populist appeal.

On the campaign trail, Trump was promising to reinvigorate American industry, stop expansive free trade deals and to improve the health care system and make it cheaper. He also called out Republican foreign policy and explicitly stated that the Iraq war was a massive failure on Bush's part. Those are areas of policy crossover with Sanders that would appeal to the kind of voters described in that 538 article.


Clinton, on the other hand, literally based her campaign on the status quo and started using the idiotic line about how any change to the Obama admin's policy set would necessarily undermine his legacy. This is exactly the reason why so many Obama voters who were disgruntled with his presidency, stayed home.


To be angry about this phenomenon is to be angry that Sanders has a legitimate ability to appeal to a subset of non-standard Democratic voters, which is something that he should be complimented on rather than attacked for.

 

[kpt018]

Wrong. Read the 538 post that I linked. Bernie-to-Trump voters are largely conservative leaning, anti-establishment voters who feel left behind and wanted to see the system disrupted. Both Sanders and Trump ran on breaking the status quo and had populist appeal.

On the campaign trail, Trump was promising to reinvigorate American industry, stop expansive free trade deals and to improve the health care system and make it cheaper. He also called out Republican foreign policy and explicitly stated that the Iraq war was a massive failure on Bush's part. Those are areas of policy crossover with Sanders that would appeal to the kind of voters described in that 538 article.


Clinton, on the other hand, literally based her campaign on the status quo and started using the idiotic line about how any change to the Obama admin's policy set would necessarily undermine his legacy. This is exactly the reason why so many Obama voters who were disgruntled with his presidency, stayed home.


To be angry about this phenomenon is to be angry that Sanders has a legitimate ability to appeal to a subset of non-standard Democratic voters, which is something that he should be complimented on rather than attacked for.

It’s absolutely ridiculous to believe Trump “drained the swamp” or disrupted the system. Bernie’s key issues are healthcare, climate change and corruption and Trump’s record on all of those is atrocious. Trump is actually the anti-Bernie in every way with one exception - war.

Im sure those voters believe what you’re saying. My point is they’re fucking dumb.

And your view of Hillary is dead wrong. She ran as a liberal. You just didn’t like her. Let me guess, you voted for Trump didn’t you? Or were you a Jill Stein guy?

 

[Fawlty]

To me he’s clearly the best candidate if you think turnout is the key to beating Trump, which I definitely do.

That seems far from settled.

 

[Jack V Savage]

One could also articulate enthusiasm without randomly equating it to unreasonable or obnoxious behavior. On predicting how durable and self-perpetuating support is, I think amount of individual donations and, specifically, amount of repeat individual donations, as well as amount of volunteer hours logged, would be as good of metrics as any....and don't have much to do with being unreasonable or obnoxious.

The point there was that "enthusiasm" is not so easily measured or determined after a measurement attempt, and a lot of what appears to be "enthusiasm" is obnoxiousness. What's different about the fanbases of Bernie and Biden is that they are much more likely than the fanbases of any other candidates to be *only* enthusiastic about their candidate (BTW, source), which isn't the same as being *more* enthusiastic. General-election polling at this point isn't super reliable, but it doesn't show a clear effect for that exclusivity, while you'd think it would if it were a real factor. Also, between those two, you see the problem. While there is a lot of overlap in the fanbases of Biden and Bernie, I would guess that the most enthusiastic supporters of each would not like the other (they're not actually that far apart on policy, but their branding couldn't be further apart, though it's possible that there are a fair amount of voters who want an old white guy and would be uncomfortable with the non-old-white-guy candidates).

I'm not blaming Sanders or his voters, I blame Hillary. Anyway, your first link says 12% of Bernie supporters went to Trump. Are you saying they weren't really Bernie supporters, or that they didn't matter because some Obama supporters also voted for Trump? Either way, my point was that the idea that blaming centrists doesn't make any more sense than blaming progressives. The election was so close that if every vote that went to Jill Stein in those 3 states had gone to Hillary, she would have won. Let's blame Jill!

Yeah, a race that close is going to be way overdetermined.

 

[Jack V Savage]

The issue is that most of the #HillaryNever crowd weren't traditional Democratic voters. They weren't going to vote for anybody on Democratic ticket besides Bernie, so they fact that they didn't vote for Hillary is much less relevant than all of the millions of habitual Democratic voters who either voted for Trump or stayed home despite being told that Trump was an "existential threat."

They weren't going to vote for Bernie in the general, either. Those were people who just oppose the nominee.

 

[Jack V Savage]

If anyone wants a good laugh, Tom Watson, a Democratic strategist, is on Twitter to nearly exclusively shit on Bernie Sanders.

https://twitter.com/tomwatson

It also seems that the central strategy for smearing Sanders has moved past his identity or his policies and now solely rests upon insisting, always without any evidence, that his supporters are rabid, that he does not do enough to keep his supporters from hassling people, and that therefore he's a bad candidate.

Lots of evidence that his supporters are rabid and that they hassle people (as was demonstrated earlier in this thread, I've had Bernie supporters spread lies about me personally). He actually did try to calm them down a bit in 2016, but not this time. And that is something that should be counted against him.

 

[Trotsky]

Lots of evidence that his supporters are rabid and that they hassle people (as was demonstrated earlier in this thread, I've had Bernie supporters spread lies about me personally). He actually did try to calm them down a bit in 2016, but not this time. And that is something that should be counted against him.

Good lord.

 

[BarryDillon]

Lots of evidence that his supporters are rabid and that they hassle people (as was demonstrated earlier in this thread, I've had Bernie supporters spread lies about me personally). He actually did try to calm them down a bit in 2016, but not this time. And that is something that should be counted against him.

This is crap, Jack. You're way too intelligent to make this type of argument.

 

[Gutter Chris]

Lots of evidence that his supporters are rabid and that they hassle people (as was demonstrated earlier in this thread, I've had Bernie supporters spread lies about me personally). He actually did try to calm them down a bit in 2016, but not this time. And that is something that should be counted against him.

alright forget that you arent my biggest fan and riddle me this

If the democrats know that bernie bros are rabid and likely to tank the democrats chances of winning if they dont get what they want wouldnt the sensible thing for the dnc to do would be to push bernie sanders hard and lend him their support ? Are any other candidates supporters likely to do this ?

 

[Jack V Savage]

Good lord.

It's easy to dismiss when it's not your ox being gored, and fair point that you don't care about the issue, but that doesn't mean it isn't an issue or that Bernie doesn't have a responsibility to address it. It's not just me--anyone who tries to be objective and reasonable ends up getting smeared and/or lied about by Bernie fans.

 

[BarryDillon]

I also vehemently disagree with the notion that Bernie and Biden are close on policy.

 

[Jack V Savage]

This is crap, Jack. You're way too intelligent to make this type of argument.

The argument here is that Bernie's obnoxious fans are a legitimate problem that should be addressed.

alright forget that you arent my biggest fan and riddle me this

If the democrats know that bernie bros are rabid and likely to tank the democrats chances of winning if they dont get what they want wouldnt the sensible thing for the dnc to do would be to push bernie sanders hard and lend him their support ? Are any other candidates supporters likely to do this ?

That's no way to govern a country. And besides, I suspect that a lot of the most obnoxious Bernie fans would abandon him if he actually got the nomination (that would just prove that he sold out or something).

 

[Jack V Savage]

I also vehemently disagree with the notion that Bernie and Biden are close on policy.

https://www.politico.com/2020-election/candidates-views-on-the-issues/joe-biden/

Really, what is the big difference there? One a 1-10, right-left scale, Bernie's like an 8.5 and Biden's like an 8.2.

 

[Gutter Chris]

That's no way to govern a country. And besides, I suspect that a lot of the most obnoxious Bernie fans would abandon him if he actually got the nomination (that would just prove that he sold out or something).

Its no way to govern a country to run a guy that people are actually enthusiastic about ? I dont see it like you do and to me it looks like the dnc is looking to make a huge mistake in alienating a large chunk of their voter base for a generation. If those people perceive Bernie to get fucked again at least half of them will vote republican.....In states the democrats need if they want to win

Why do you think people will abandon him in hipster fashion if he wins ?

Its a weird position for the bernie people to be in where they have enough power to tank an election but not quite enough to win it . How should the dnc handle that ?

The argument here is that Bernie's obnoxious fans are a legitimate problem that should be addressed.

How should it be addressed ?

 

[BarryDillon]

The argument here is that Bernie's obnoxious fans are a legitimate problem that should be addressed.



That's no way to govern a country. And besides, I suspect that a lot of the most obnoxious Bernie fans would abandon him if he actually got the nomination (that would just prove that he sold out or something).

Yes, and it's an absurd premise. You basically admit this in your opening by way of using anecdotal evidence.

It's just character assassination of Bernie with no merit.

 

[Phisher]

It’s absolutely ridiculous to believe Trump “drained the swamp” or disrupted the system. Bernie’s key issues are healthcare, climate change and corruption and Trump’s record on all of those is atrocious. Trump is actually the anti-Bernie in every way with one exception - war.

Never said that he did. He did, however, run as a disrupter, and he humiliated the entire Republican establishment during the primary. Yeah, he's more or less governed as a standard Republican and was lying about most of that shit on the campaign trail, but he still said it, and it did appeal to people.

Im sure those voters believe what you’re saying. My point is they’re fucking dumb.

Maybe, maybe not. If you understand US politics and aren't in a position to directly benefit from the system, you should be disgruntled with establishment though.

And your view of Hillary is dead wrong.

Hillary ran on the status quo in 2016 as a direct extension Obama's legacy. This is just factually true. It was explicitly stated by her throughout the campaign, Obama said that she was an extension of his legacy when stumping for her, and it was a major narrative in the media.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/hillar...o-preserve-president-obamas-legacy-1478601004

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...porters-dont-let-obamas-legacy-fall-to-trump/

https://time.com/4526075/hillary-clinton-barack-obama-campaigning/

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...s-democrats-seek-to-unify-party-idUSKCN0YV1UB

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2016-01-13/obama-s-legacy-depends-on-a-clinton-victory

She ran as a liberal.

Yes, she did. That doesn't conflict with my assessment of her campaign strategy.

You just didn’t like her.

No, I do not. She's a neo-liberal, and I'm a progressive leftist who's not fond of ID pol. Her politics are antithetical to mine. Same goes for Obama.


She's also an objectively terrible person and strategically incompetent politician who's responsible for Trump being in office by urging him to run, trying to facilitate his victory in the GOP primary and then running a terrible campaign against him.

Let me guess, you voted for Trump didn’t you? Or were you a Jill Stein guy?

Voted for Stein and have no regrets because I currently reside in Canada and I'm registered to vote absentee in New York. My vote didn't affect the outcome of the election.

Probably would've have held my nose tightly and voted for Hillary if I were registered in a swing state though as much as it pains me to type it.

 

[kpt018]

Never said that he did. He did, however, run as a disrupter, and he humiliated the entire Republican establishment during the primary. Yeah, he's more or less governed as a standard Republican and was lying about most of that shit on the campaign trail, but he still said it, and it did appeal to people.





Maybe, maybe not. If you understand US politics and aren't in a position to directly benefit from the system, you should be disgruntled with establishment though.



Hillary ran on the status quo in 2016 as a direct extension Obama's legacy. This is just factually true. It was explicitly stated by her throughout the campaign, Obama said that she was an extension of his legacy when stumping for her, and it was a major narrative in the media.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/hillar...o-preserve-president-obamas-legacy-1478601004

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...porters-dont-let-obamas-legacy-fall-to-trump/

https://time.com/4526075/hillary-clinton-barack-obama-campaigning/

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...s-democrats-seek-to-unify-party-idUSKCN0YV1UB

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2016-01-13/obama-s-legacy-depends-on-a-clinton-victory






Yes, she did. That doesn't conflict with my assessment of her campaign strategy.






No, I do not. She's a neo-liberal, and I'm a progressive leftist who's not fond of ID pol. Her politics are antithetical to mine. Same goes for Obama.


She's also an objectively terrible person and strategically incompetent politician who's responsible for Trump being in office by urging him to run, trying to facilitate his victory in the GOP primary and then running a terrible campaign against him.

Voted for Stein and have no regrets because I currently reside in Canada and I'm registered to vote absentee in New York. My vote didn't affect the outcome of the election.

Probably would've have held my nose tightly and voted for Hillary if I were registered in a swing state though as much as it pains me to type it.

So you’re one of the fools that fell for Trump’s con and/or right wing propaganda? I mean, you didn’t address the core point I made that Sanders is the anti-Trump. Supporting a candidate on the sole basis of being a “disruptor” is really dumb if you don’t consider how they do it and what they’re looking to accomplish.

And you’re wrong about Hillary. Her platform was liberal and it’s not debatable. Give it a stab if you like though. I’m not going to argue you should like her but calling her (insert derogatory but meaningless word like neoliberal) is wrong. If she was running in this field she’d be just a tad right of Bernie and Warren but left of everyone else.

Stein?!? Cmon man.

 

[Trotsky]

It's easy to dismiss when it's not your ox being gored, and fair point that you don't care about the issue, but that doesn't mean it isn't an issue or that Bernie doesn't have a responsibility to address it.

This faux controversy could be leveled against any candidate ever. It's as much a matter of the shamelessness of detractors as it is the aggressiveness of supporters, as any Sanders surrogate could earnestly claim to have received hateful messages from Hillary fans.

And the fact that centrist hacks like that guy are so hot in the biscuit to complain that Sanders needs to constantly take measures to actively hurt his campaign by characterizing his own supporters as unruly and censuring them, yet were unanimously uncritical of hateful messages and strategies coming from the actual campaign of their former preferred candidate toward Sanders ("he's sexist" and "he cares more about the NRA than dead kids") and Obama before him, kind of pulls the already-thin veil off of the critique.

And maintaining wildly disparate standards of conduct for the center and the left is a tried and true tradition in Democratic politics.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Its no way to govern a country to run a guy that people are actually enthusiastic about ?

To give in to the most irrational and obnoxious supporters of a candidate solely to prevent them from rebelling. We've already seen how that turns out with the GOP.

I dont see it like you do and to me it looks like the dnc is looking to make a huge mistake in alienating a large chunk of their voter base for a generation. If those people perceive Bernie to get fucked again at least half of them will vote republican.....In states the democrats need if they want to win

The DNC is a non-factor here. We're talking about voters. Should they vote for someone who isn't their top choice out of fear that their preferred candidate losing would cause them to flip or abandon the process.

Why do you think people will abandon him in hipster fashion if he wins ?

Because, as the other guy pointed out, we're talking about people who aren't ideologically aligned with Bernie and who dislike the Democratic Party. It's not that they think that Bernie is so great as much as that they think that supporting him, for now, hurts the party.

How should it be addressed ?

Bernie should make an effort to push back against sleazy attacks on other candidates and reach out more broadly.

Yes, and it's an absurd premise. You basically admit this in your opening by way of using anecdotal evidence.

It's just character assassination of Bernie with no merit.

It's not even a comment on Bernie's character. And I think it's a very widely observed phenomenon (@Trotsky was pointing to someone else noticing it).

 

[Jack V Savage]

This faux controversy could be leveled against any candidate ever. It's as much a matter of the shamelessness of detractors as it is the aggressiveness of supporters, as any Sanders surrogate could earnestly claim to have received hateful messages from Hillary fans.

I haven't observed anything like it within a primary before except from Paul fans. I guess Gabbard and Yang have some of that going, too, but they are some of the same people and their numbers are smaller.

And the fact that centrist hacks like that guy are so hot in the biscuit to complain that Sanders needs to constantly take measures to actively hurt his campaign by characterizing his own supporters as unruly and censuring them, yet were unanimously uncritical of hateful messages and strategies coming from the actual campaign of their former preferred candidate toward Sanders ("he's sexist" and "he cares more about the NRA than dead kids") and Obama before him, kind of pulls the already-thin veil off of the critique.

And maintaining wildly disparate standards of conduct for the center and the left is a tried and true tradition in Democratic politics.

So you're calling a guy a "centrist hack" and saying he's "hot in the biscuit" (never heard that before, but it's good) to complain that Sanders needs to "constantly take measures to actively hurt his campaign." Bit of nastiness followed by a misstatement of the point. Hurts your credibility here and isn't something one can respond to reasonably.